Labour face public backlash if they replace Gordon Brown

Labour face a public backlash if they choose to replace Gordon Brown without
holding a general election, the party has warned.

Never in British history have there been two consecutive unelected prime ministers.

The party will come under intense pressure to hold an immediate general election with critics branding another internal handover of power as "completely unacceptable".

Party chiefs now face a dilemma over the next few months as to whether they seek to replace the leader and incur public wrath or continue with an embattled Mr Brown as Prime Minister until the next general election.

With the party in desperate straights, any constitutional concerns may quickly be abandoned.

If replaced, Mr Brown will never have fought a general election. There are claims from his own backbenchers that he is a liability at the polls.

The Conservatives said they would bitterly oppose the coronation of another Labour leader without the party going to the public.

Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: "We cannot possibly accept two unelected prime ministers in one Parliament; it would wreck all constitutional precedents.

"One coronation was unacceptable enough but another would be an utterly inconceivable situation."

Unlike America, in this country the public vote for individual MPs in their constituencies and it is then up to the party with the most MPs to select its leader.

There is nothing in law to stop them switching leaders as often as they chose.

However, as British politics becomes increasingly presidential in style, some experts believe that many members of the party support a potential prime minister when choosing which party to back.

Therefore, it could be seen as an abuse of the electoral mandate to repeatedly switch leaders between general elections.

If Labour does select another leader it is likely to lead to debate among political grandees about whether new constitutional safeguards are necessary but there is little that could be done to stop it occurring.

Lord Heseltine, the former Conservative deputy prime minister who challenged Margaret Thatcher for the Tory leadership, said: "The by-election is an absolutely extraordinary result, and puts Brown in a terrible position.

"As for whether the party could now replace an unelected leader with another, it doesn't have an exact precedent but of course it would be allowed.

"We have a retread government and you can retread a retread.

"The public may not like it but they wouldn't have any choice - Parliament is supreme. As long as the new prime minister could command a majority, they would cling on."

Lord Desai, a Labour peer and LSE professor, described the issue as a "red herring".

"The talk of whether it is proper that we could have two unelected prime ministers in the same parliament is a total red herring - US presidential nonsense," he said.

"Prime ministers are not elected - MPs are, and they form governments led by their leader.

"There is no legal requirement for a party to form a government other than to have a majority in the House of Commons.

"Any new Labour leader would have that, and the public would not be angered by it."

Even if a new leader is brought in there is a growing faction within the Labour Party who believes that a snap election might be in their best interests.

They hope that by promoting a young leader - or an older figure surrounded by young Cabinet ministers - the party could announce a new policy agenda and then quickly go to the polls.

One Labour insider said: "Our best hope at the moment might be to unveil a fresh, radical new team and then we might get an immediate bounce in the polls.

"In those circumstances - as we learnt last autumn - it might be best to seize the moment and call the election."